“Far too many boys approach adolescence having experienced violence, witnessed violence, dropped out of school, had risky sex, or practiced other risk-taking behaviors because they believe that they must do so to be seen by their peers and their communities as “real men.” This has real and long-lasting impacts on the lives of women and girls and inhibits the creation of respectful and equal relationships.”

When men are involved in feminist work, this is ally politics. [… and] ally politics can only ever been seen as one component of social change efforts.

Black feminist Audre Lorde wrote, “The master’s tools will never dismantle the master’s house.” She might also have written, ‘The masters will never dismantle the master’s house.’ Certainly not by themselves. Certainly not without being part of a broader feminist movement. […]

What about the actual work of engaging men? Engaging men doesn’t easily or quickly produce substantial change in gender inequalities, although it can certainly contribute to change. […]

Perhaps the most important reason why engaging men is not a game changer is that changing gender inequality, including changing men, is hard. […] Large proportions of men resent feminist efforts and resist the recognition of sexism. They deny, minimise, and blame.

[…] Sometimes, engaging men is the same old patriarchal game. […]

However, if we can change men, if men can change, in large numbers and in substantial ways, yes, that will be a real change in the game.

In violence prevention, we must move beyond simplistic notions of “white men saving brown women from brown men”. Women from CALD and indigenous communities are not necessarily hapless victims, and nor are immigrant and refugee men any more sexist or violent than their English counterparts. In any context – rich or poor, Anglo or otherwise, newly arrived or fifth-generation – work with men must recognise the intersections of race, class, and sexuality which shape men’s lives.

In efforts to prevent men’s violence against women, there is a growing emphasis on the need to engage men. Men are becoming involved as participants in education programs, audiences for social marketing, activists and advocates, community leaders, and policy makers. First then, what does this ‘engaging men’ field look like? Second, what are its achievements and what are its limitations or dangers? This field is one instance of a wider ‘turn to men’ in gender politics, an increasing emphasis on the roles that men can play in building gender equality.

What are the best practices to promote men’s involvement in SRH while simultaneously promoting gender equality? Published by Sonke Gender Justice Network, this report argues that engaging men in SRH and gender equality can lead to better SRH outcomes for men and women, and prevent reinforcing male power over reproductive and sexual decision-making. A conceptual model that can be used for programming, monitoring and evaluation to engage men in SRH and gender equality including men as clients, partners and agents of positive change is provided.

The purpose of this paper is to provide practical guidance to policymakers and program managers on how to engage men and address harmful male norms in seven key areas of intervention in relation to HIV/AIDS: 1 Social and Behaviour Change in Men; 2 Violence against women; 3 Men, Sex Work and Transactional Sex; 4 Men, Substance abuse and HIV/AIDS; 5 Male Circumcision; 6 Men, VCT and Treatment; 7 Male Norms and the Caregiving for People Living with and Affected by HIV/AIDS.